Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2021 March 19/Data
Data[edit]
In the section editors can provide data relevant to the discussion. I offer what I've done here in the hopes that it may be useful. My thoughts are that the editor would aim to provide the data in an unbiased way yet at the same time signatures can be provided (I put them here at the top of each section) so that it's possible to see who worked on finding that particular data at that particular point in time. Maybe even if this data is not definitive in any way it could stimulate further more sophisticated investigation that could help to lead to consensus. My thoughts are that if there are any comments on the data gathered that could be in a separate subsection, say "Discussion" or "Comments". People could link to this data in the course of the discussion above. Jjjjjjjjjj (talk) 19:52, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
Using the Massviews Tool to get a list of all articles in a category sorted by viewcount[edit]
By Jjjjjjjjjj (talk) 19:52, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
Massviews can be used to get a list of all articles in a category sorted by viewcount (I don't know what exactly is being done server side and client side, but want to note that for Category:Wikipedia articles with possible conflicts of interest with 14,898 pages it took a few minutes on my machine when I did it again though it was able to go from a cached version).
- Permalink for Category:Wikipedia articles with possible conflicts of interest 3/2/2021 - 3/22/2021 (14,898 pages)
- Permalink for Category:Wikipedia articles with undisclosed paid content 3/1/2021 - 3/21/2021 (2,010 pages)
- Permalink for Category:Wikipedia articles with paid content 3/2/2021 - 3/22/2021 (163 pages)
Presence and state of discussion for the top 10 viewed articles in Category:Wikipedia_articles_with_undisclosed_paid_content[edit]
By Jjjjjjjjjj (talk) 19:52, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
What's here is a list of the top ten articles by view count in Category:Wikipedia_articles_with_undisclosed_paid_content. I went through and looked for discussion on undisclosed paid editing.
| Number | Article | Views Per Day | Discussion on UPE | Month Tagged |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | F5 Networks | 47,272 / day | No | October 2020 |
| 2 | Jamie Kern Lima | 2,831 / day | No | April 2020 |
| 3 | Betika | 2,464 / day | No | September 2018 |
| 4 | Tony Buzbee | 2,335 / day | No | June 2020 |
| 5 | Grammarly | 1,592 / day | Yes, there’s been continued discussion of conflict of interest over the years. Hipal also known as Ronz has corresponded with NCdave along with people specifically identified as being with Grammarly such as Nik.grammarly and Michael.Grammarly. | May 2020 |
| 6 | Kimora Lee Simmons | 1,547 / day | No | Feburary 2020 |
| 7 | Special Activities Center | 1,394 / day | Yes, this one was recently tagged by MarioGom (not pinged). | March 2021 |
| 8 | Uber Eats | 1,167 / day | Yes, though the discussions look to be for a previous taggings of the article (in 2016 and 2018). The article then got tagged again as part of the articles tagged in the VentureKit sockpuppet investigation. | December 2020 |
| 9 | Arianna Huffington | 1,105 / day | No | November 2020 |
| 10 | Dara Huang | 1,085 / day | No | January 2020 |
I don’t know why F5 Networks is getting so many pageviews. Seems to spike on weekdays and then decrease substantially on weekends and holidays. (see Pageviews tool on F5 Networks).
I think it possible that more recent taggings have had more discussion added as I noticed this for these associated with Mathematica and Stephen Wolfram.
Data on tag removal using Wayback Machine[edit]
By Jjjjjjjjjj (talk) 19:52, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
What I did is to use the Wayback Machine capture of Category:articles with undisclosed paid content from September 2017 (captured 2019-04-11), and compared it to the current Category:Wikipedia_articles_with_undisclosed_paid_content_from_September_2017, and then went through five articles that are on the earlier list but not on the current one, and sought to see how things went in terms of tag removal for that article.
One could also consider: Wayback Machine capture of Category:Wikipedia_articles_with_undisclosed_paid_content (captured 2017-10-09). One could note that the listing at that time was 217 articles tagged in September 2017, and yet today for September 2017 that number is down to only 94.
Comment: Maybe the tags should be added back to ATyr Pharma and Teo A. Babun. I have not done so, but if somebody does do that perhaps that could noted in a Comments section as talked about above.
- Matty Amendola: this one got deleted multiple times.
- ATyr Pharma: tag removed by user which is likley a SPA based on contributions and username.(diff)
- Teo A. Babun: tag removed by user which is likely a SPA based on contributions and username. (diff)
- Chamberlain Group: tag removed by editor Pmsyyz with edit summary, "looks good". (diff)
- EC Harris: tag removed by editor Dormskirk with edit summary, "Tag removed - the edits seem to have been made with the approval of an independent editor". (diff)
Data on tag removal from the VentureKit investigation[edit]
By Jjjjjjjjjj (talk) 19:52, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
This list was included at Template talk:Undisclosed paid, and can be updated here (note that some of the times listed were taken based on my timezone setting).
87 articles were included in the list based on those that got tagged in early December 2020 as part of the VentureKit investigation.
This script can be used to check for which ones have changed, and as of this writing in March 2021 there are 74 articles that are still tagged where 13 have had the tag removed.
Of these 13 my assessment is that for these 7 editing (or reversion) was done as part of the removal (or after the removal)
- Alan Joyce (executive)
- Lochlann Quinn
- Adore Me
- DoorDash
- Partners In Health
- ColourPop Cosmetics
- Yuma Regional Medical Center
For these 2 although no specific editing was done by the remover the edit summary indicates that a review was done.
For these 4 the tagger removed the tag, but there isn't any indication of clean up editing or a review.
Data on subject perspective[edit]
By Jjjjjjjjjj (talk) 19:52, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
I can list here two exchanges relating to the VentureKit investigation between tagger and subject.
- User_talk:Blablubbs/Archive_5#Undisclosed_paid_tag_on_Monzo_page
- User_talk:Blablubbs/Archive_7#Regd_Undisclosed_paid_added_to_Mckesson_corporation_wiki_page
In both of these the employee seemed somewhat perplexed by the presence of the tag.
Data on edit warring relating to a tag[edit]
By Jjjjjjjjjj (talk) 19:52, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
Empirically there are 3 articles where I've seen a kind of edit warring going on over the placement of the tag. Please note that by edit warring I just mean that one editor placed the tag, and then it was removed, and then it was put back. I don't mean that there was necessarily any kind of sustained manifested ill will between the editors.
- Maria Elvira Salazar: Revision history
- Rajiv Jain: Revision history
- Atlantic Water World: Revision history
For the ones associated with the VentureKit investigation after removal they've just generally stayed off.